Single Comment

number of squares is can be a really misleading stat when considering the 'size' of a game - in this case how long it will take to play (realizing of course that there's always a big range for any given game). a more important number is the how many pieces are in the game. for example, chess and xiangqi both start with 32 pieces and both take approximately the same amount of time to play, xiangqi should definitely not be considered a 'large' variant. and if you look at omegachess, it adds 40 squares to the board but just 4 non-pawn pieces. the starting setup can be a factor too, i find omegachess games are generally slightly longer than grandchess because the extra squares are between the armies - not behind them as in grandchess, and the new pieces are leapers instead of riders. i've found a lot of 10x8 and 10x10 games are closer in playing time to chess than to truly large variants such as doublechess, quantum, rennchess, and chushogi.